About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
LANGUAGE
English 27
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)
blamed on a spontaneous demonstration over a film, a mob. he has contacted the cia as well as committees in the house and senate to offer his testimony. meanwhile, new questions on whether or not general petraeus told everything that he knew on benghazi the first time he sat down for testimony. that would have been three days after the attack on the 14th of september. so good morning. a lot to chew on. we'll connect all the dots. i'm bill hemmer. good morning. martha: that's a huge headline that petraeus will testify. lawmakers were set to be briefed by the fbi today on capitol hill. they have a lot of questions about all of this. why did no one inform congress or the white house that the director of the cia was currently under investigation. big question mark over that. doug, what's the latest on this today? >> developments continue to come in fast and furiously. catherine herridge is reporting some key lawmakers are openly questioning the veracity of david petraeus' testimony when he said the attack was a flash mob. and a demonstration that spun out of control. with that explanation ov
's susan boyle. bill: here we go. a fox news exclusive. former cia director david petraeus who resigned friday after acknowledging the extramarital affair with his biographer has agreed to testify voluntarily before the house and senate intelligence committee. prior to his resignation he had been scheduled to testify about the scandal in benghazi, libya where the ambassador and three other americans were killed. that was initially blamed on a spontaneous demonstration over a film, a mob. he has contacted the cia as well as committees in the house and senate to offer his testimony meanwhile, new questions on whether or not general petraeus told everything that he knew on benghazi the first time he sat down for testimony. that would have been three days after the attack on the 14th of september. so good morning. a lot to chew on. we'll connect all the dots. i'm bill hemmer. good morning. martha: that's a huge headline that petraeus will testify. lawmakers were set to be briefed by the fbi today on capitol hill. they have a lot of questions about all of this. why did no one inform congress
: thank you, bill. the former cia director arrived here on capitol hill an hour and 20 minutes ago and a source close to the general told fox news the expectation he will tell the house intelligence and senate intelligence committees he too believed it was terrorism within 20 four hours of the attack. active link to al qaeda and ansar al-sharia to wanted to establish a islamic state in eastern libya. the source told fox news they expect the general to bring with him the original talking points put together by the cia. those talking points had input from other intelligence agencies as well as the office of the director of national intelligence and that petraeus apparently did not know they would be provided to u.n. ambassador susan rice. he does not know who the author of the final version was and these talking points would be uses as the basis for the statements on sunday talk shows on september 16th that this was spontaneous event and linked to the anti-islam video. lawmakers said they wanted to stay very focused on the attack itself and not the former director's personal problems
with this fox news alert and we're getting new details now in the scandal that ended the career of cia director david petraeus. the fbi is investigating whether the general's mistress, paula broadwell, may have revealed classified information, information she only had because of her relationship with the general. that is the question they're asking. good morning, everybody. i'm martha maccallum in "america's newsroom.". >> i'm gregg jarrett in for bill hemmer. that information may contradict information that general petraeus gave to congress just days later. martha: doug luzader joins us live with this report from washington. good morning, doug. >> reporter: good morning, guys. at a very basic level this is the store of an affair between general david petraeus and his biographer paula broad well. it gets complicated. there may be national security implication including into the broad investigation into the consulate in benghazi on september 11th. there is no question she would have had prime access to one. key players. she made a couple of public appearances to talk about that. that was at the
on the radio. >> gretchen: or log on for our after the show show. new turn in the scandal that cost the cia director david petraeus's job. the pentagon now investigating general john allen. you know who he is? the top commander in afghanistan, for allegedly exchanging thousands of possibly inappropriate e-mails with, this woman, jill kelly, tampa, florida. she is a close friend of the petraeus family who sparked initial investigation into the cia director. that is what we've been told so far. follow the bouncing ball. it is a tuesday. martha: try if you can, right? good morning i'm martha maccallum. you will need a flow chart to follow this story as it develops because the cast of characters in this growing saga. the pentagon we're told is sorting through 20 to 30,000 pages of e-mails between this woman and general allen. she got, the fbi involved in the whole thing because she said that she was receive ofing harassing e-mails from this women, petraeus's biographer and ex-mistress, paula broadwell. bill: got all that? martha: i think so, you need a pen. catherine herridge is live in d.c.. t
, the acting cia director. we also have a top deputy from the fbi. an undersecretary from the state department in addition to the head of the national counterterrorism center. this is the nation's hub for threat assessments in this country. what is most eagerly anticipated is the testimony of former cia director david petraeus. what we expect now that will happen on friday, martha. martha: fast nating to see how each of those sides, and david petraeus present what was going on and what their agencies were doing. then there is this big question, catherine, which john mccain is pushing for, a special investigation, a panel, a select committee to be put in place. is there any chance of that? >> reporter: well there seems to be some immediate pushback. to lay it out for folks. we have three senior senate republicans who believe the fallout from benghazi is so significant it is on par with some of the major scandals of american history. >> watergate investigation benefited from a joint select committee. iran-contra benefited from a select committee. i think finding the truth about benghazi is only
. bill: there is fallout over weather the cia notes object benghazi were edited and if so, by whom. >> the original talking points repaired by the cia were different from the ones finally put out. bill: who changed them? the chairman of the house intelligence committee is here live in a couple minutes. martha: rising republican star florida senator marco rubio making a trip to iowa. what he had to say about rumors about a run for president in 2016. >> i think what happened is there are those who made promises to them. we have more government and a bigger government program that does this. if we tax one people more to pay for another group of people maybe that's the solution to the problems. here's the truth. big government doesn't help the people we are trying to help, it rurts them. martha: there are folks already camping out to be the first ones in the store for black friday. people are pitching tents. they have their electric and camping gears. they have all the comfort of home. >> we have most of the comforts of home. >> our family when they get done eating they will bring over
line. the state department put out a time line. the cia put out a time line or its version of events during attacks and in the aftermath. but what we don't have a good sense of is where the president of the united states was from minute to minute. i think the republicans will insist on that and i think they should. bill: he said he issues his directives immediately after the attack and during attack. where does that take you? where do you end up? >> that's the key question. when the president of the united states issues a directive, everybody flies into action. the military records what he told them to do, what they have been instructed to do and from that follows a series of steps and people execute his directives. we need to know what the directive was, who it was given to what they did with it. the president said he instructed every bit of help be provided to the people on the ground there. we know that didn't happen. we need a better accounting of why that didn't happen if the president said it should have. bill: there is a statement today at 1:00. i'm not sure there will be ques
on the cia talking points conflicts with testimony given by the director of national intelligence. this as senator chuck grassley presses the defendants justice and the fbi on their roles in david petraeus' extramarital affair. catherine herridge with us from the beginning. what do the conflicting statements tell us? >> reporter: thursday in a classified session, the director of national intelligence and his counterparts came to capitol hill and said they didn't know who was responsible for changess to those cia talking points that minimized the role of terrorists in the attacks. now a spokesman says the intelligence community says the intelligence communities was behind the changes that stripped out changes including al qaeda. the. lawmakers were given a completely different account of what happened. quote, chairman rogers looks forward to discussing this new explanation with director clapper as soon as possible to understand how the dni reached this conclusion and why leaders of the intelligence community testified they were unaware of who changed the talking points. this is a v
petraeus says the comments came from intel as he was head of the cia at the time including specific references to al qaeda being involved. so another question for her would clearly be, who changed that, who decided not to include that, right? >> let's come to the second point. that she says she simply read these talking points and if that's true, really poses a much more fundamental question. why did she read the talking points? and it goes to a basic disagreement about how senior officials function in government. there are plenty of people, and i can same secretaries of state, who simply regurgitate what their bureaucracies produced for them, who relied on talking points. talking points were put in front of them and they read them. that is one way to approach government. that is not the way i approached government and got me in considerable trouble from time to time. if that is the way she approached it i think there is question whether from a point of view of judgment that is something that you want to see perpetuated. martha: talk about the politics of all of this for a moment be
rice was thrown under the bus and they all knew she didn't have the information from the cia. then i thought you would have to feel sorry for her. since yesterday talking to some of those to whom she talked i'm convinced in my mind that she is part of the coverup, she knew all the time the cia information that was given to her. but your point is very good. i could not support her in the secretary of state if she is nominated. bill: give me a reason why. >> she is on the wrong side of the membership of the u.n. palestinian authority. she is on the opposite side of where i am. she has kept on funding you necessary cowhich is in violation of instructions given to her through law. she is on the opposite side of every issue that i am. for that reason i would have opposed her anyway. bill: it appears to me and many others when we listen to folks like yourself talk that this issue is much bigger than susan rice. let me drill down on one area here. because yesterday the cia acting director at 10:00 a.m. apparently blamed the fbi for changing the language and the guidance and the talking poin
questions in the media. he says general petraeus * said the cia knew within 24 hours al qaeda was behind it but susan rice did not use that information on the talk shows saying the siege resulted from a spontaneous protest. last thursday clapper tells one story and now according to his spokesman its is just the opposite. do you think he is not still telling the truth? >> it's hard to know. it's the old quote. i'm not mad you lied to me. i'm mad i can't believe anything you tell me. this is the head our intelligence an changes his mind within 24 hours. today is the 70th day since four our fellow americans were murdered. we are talking about susan rice's career progression and james clapper's ability to keep a fact straight and desperate housewives having an affair with generals. gregg: and four people are dead. we are talking about a tragedy here. murdered by terrorists. in reference to james clapper, one story last week, now a different story. it's a crime to lie to congress. do you think a serious look at that needs to be undertaken by perhaps an independent prosecutor? >> it depends. i
the cia timeline that was provided yesterday to reporters, fox was not invited to that briefing, but, the cia timeline suggests that the quick reaction force that came from tripoli, which was made up of a cia element got delayed at the airport for three hours and 15 minutes while they were waiting for a libyan he is court and for vehicles and weapons. that was a crucial number of hours that that team could have helped the team at. cia an next. martha: glen doherty was part of that team. jennifer, thank you very much. bill: fox news alert now on new images from staten island, new york jrk south of the harbor in manhattan. look what we have here. these are homes that have been moved as a result of hurricane sandy out into a marshland. we're looking live here at the amount of devastation people are going through there. standing water still today. i see at least one individual there now walking to the right of your screen. where is the help? that is what they are wondering. we heard from countless people on camera pleading for more help and guidance what they can do and how they can do i
why was it that so much of the raw intelligence product, the notes from the -- the cable from the cia station chief on the ground in libya, other reports that we were getting, telephone intercepts, all pointed squarely, to use her word, to a terrorist attack and that that didn't get a mention from her. gregg: right. you know, rice does have, we know, access to classified intelligence. she could easily have learned the truth ahead of her television appearances which invites the question does she really have a duty to do that before she goes out and tells the world what turned out to be a lie? >> yeah. i mean, i think she does. look, this was -- the administration will tell you that this was something of a tryout for susan rice as a potential secretary of state nominee. and if that's the case, she failed in the tryout. she has an obligation to go and make sure that the information she's presenting to the american public is as true as can be. and we also have to go back and look at how these talking points that she relied on came to be. i mean, why was it that james clapper, to choose ju
by the intelligence community. former cia director david petraeus told closed intelligence hearings last friday that the intelligence community knew almost immediately that it was a terrorist attack that had little to do with a video even though he told lawmakers on september 14th that a video had sparked the attack. >> when discussing the attacks against our facilities in benghazi, i relied solely and squarely on the information provided to me by the intelligence community. i made clear that the information was preliminary and that our investigations would give us the definitive answers. >> reporter: senator john mccain and others would like for james clapper to return to capitol hill to explain why he told them that he did not know who changed the intelligence talking points. sean turner says it clapper's on agency. >> she made these statements last night, the eve of thanksgiving, people are cooking, why are we just now hearing from her ten weeks after the attack? >> reporter: essentially, because it's increasingly clear that the president wants to nominate her to be his next secretary of sta
to the cia put ultimately the government speaks with one voice. this administration can't blame this component or, it is like, a man blaming his foot if he is charged with kicking somebody. the president is in charge. he is the commander-in-chief. he is not the meteorologist in chief. he is the commander-in-chief. he said the minute i learned of this attack, which, presumes to me that it was while it was ongoing because it lasted for six hours, the minute i learned of it i issued a directive to secure or personnel. what assets did he put in the air? what troops did he send to benghazi to secure our personnel? what did he do? bill i will not have a chance to ask him the question but i would hope you and others in the media would hold him just as responsible. bill: we hope to that that opportunity. but drill down on this. what the administration has suggested in its public statement that is the attacks came without warning. do these cables directly undercut that in your view? >> well these cables in addition to two prior attacks on the consulate and assassination attempt on the br
close sure of a cia base. they're protracking the war, not us. the issue is somehow is this unfair? what is to be gained by taking the enemy combatants in guantanamo and putting them with prisoners in the military or federal system who are criminals? the people at guantanamo bay are not criminals. they're enemy combatants there as a result of a war. bill: senator feinstein argues that you have a 180 terrorists now being housed in maximum security prisons here in the u.s. but your point is well-taken. if you were to apprehend those responsible for killing our ambassador in libya and three others where would you take them? isn't guantanamo the best option? melissa: it absolutely is. it provides the isolation. listen all review bodies look at guantanamo through the years, believe it is highly regarded well-run facility protections the rights to anyone there. anyone been there, our detainees are treated there better than anybody in our federal and military systems in the united states. bill: democratic senate voted with kelly ayotte, republican from new hampshire. this is almost night fall.
attack on our consulate in libya. among those expected to testify, head of the cia, david petraeus. now republican congressman jason chaffetz back home in utah, a member of the house oversight government reform committee that had its own hearings two weeks ago. welcome back to "america's newsroom.". catherine herridge is reporting that the list of suspects after the raid on our consulate in benghazi that killed our u.s. ambassador has now extended to several dozen people. many of them with ties into egypt and cairo. what more do you know about that, sir? >> we do know that there are dozens of suspects. this threes right in the -- flies in the face of the administration told us that this was some mob and a video that got out of control. what is clear from the beginning it was terrorist attack that was coordinated. there were terrorist at it being activities in benghazi in months leading up to this. thanks to senator lindsey graham we're able to interview somebody there in tunisia. bill: you were just in tripoli. you did not come back with a favorable review. you have alleged that the adm
is the first question, who gave you the talking points? who wrote the cia memos? she will be under oath and have to tell the truth. bill: lindsey graham was out saying i blame the president above everybody else what happened in libya. >> i think what the administration wants to avoid congressional hearings of any sort what really happened. bill: is that possible? >> you bet it is, if they have a confirmation hearing of secretary rice the first question she will be asked who wrote the talking points for you? why did you go out even days later and obvious to every housewife in america it was terrorist attack? why did you go out and continue to blame a youtube video? why did you continue to say it was a flashmob that got out of control. bill: kt, thank you. there are more questions as you continue to scratch the surface what is developing into a changing region. good to see you there. martha, what is coming up next? martha: a topic raised by kt with your talk moments ago, unprecedented power grab perhaps underway by the muslim brotherhood that backed egyptian president mohammed morzsy ther
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)